Readers' Comments (1)

the following writers, all firmly in the Democratic camp, all of whom predicted a glorious resuscitation of America upon Obama’s election, are hardly more upbeat in their assessment of the AWOL president.

Robert Reich, the first Clinton Labor Secretary, who was “dazzled” by Obama in ’08, said the following in The Huffington Post: “[T]he man who has occupied the Oval Office since January, 2009 is someone entirely different—a man seemingly without a compass, an inside-the-Beltway dealmaker who doesn’t explain his compromises in light of larger goals… A more disturbing explanation [for Obama not speaking directly to Americans] is that he simply lacks the courage to tell the truth.”

Longtime left-winger William Greider, says in The Nation: “The president has done grievous damage to the most vulnerable by trying to fight the GOP on its ground—accepting the premise that deficits and debt should be a national priority.” For good measures, he calls Obama’s actions “mendacious” and “facile.”

The New Republic’s John Judis is distressed, as the headline of his July 30 piece suggests: “If Obama Likes Lincoln So Much, He Should Start Acting Like Him.” Worried about next year’s vote from “independents,” the key to any election, Judis speculates that what these men and women “might… want from a president is leadership and not mediation.

Finally, the Times’ Maureen Dowd takes a slightly different approach, expressing amazement, and a weird kind of admiration, that the “[T]owel-snapping Tea Party crazies” have “changed the entire discussion” in Washington, and made Obama and House Speaker John Boehner irrelevant. She concludes: “What if this is all a cruel joke on us? What if the people who hate government are good at it and the people who love government are bad at it?”